Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1887-07-21
COMPUTATION TICKETS.

The impartial mind, it appears to us,
cannot recognize the logic of the people
who insist that a Communication ticket can
be used otherwise than as expressed upon
its face. Take the case of the South Pa
ciic Coast Railroad Company, which is
being assailed because it refuses to allow
tickets calling for one round trim a day
between given points, to be used up before
the date Of its expiration, by more fire.
quent than daily trips.
he ferry Communication ticket between
san Francisco and the Alameda side of
the Gay, ON that route, expresses upon its
face, practically, that it is sold at less than
regular single fare rates, upon the condi-
ton that it is not to entitle the holder to
more than one round trip per day. No
other construction can be reasonably given
to the conditions printed, and which must
constitute contract between the carrier
and the buyer, since he must know that
for the privilege of the lower rate, condi-
tlons are imposed and become the consid-
Grafton for the transaction.
1t i oontended, that if one has bought
ticket emitting the holder TO thirty trips
in thirty days, he may and should be al
lowed to make thirty trips in twenty, or
ten, or five days, if he chooses, since he
has paid for so many trips, and it can
make no difference when they are taken.
The rule thus sought to be applied would
simply amount to a reduction of the reg
ular single fare to the Communication rate
1t would practically abolish the single
rate. Where the commuter fails to exer-
else his right to make one trip day, it is
claimed that he should be allowed
to wear out his unused trips by
doubling them on some DAYS or
making them at a date later than the
limit Of the ticket. But reflection ought
to convince any one that if the contract of
Communication is good for one thing it is
good as TO all things relating or attaching
to it. II guarantees the buyer certain spe-
cifc conditions. Now, if the commuter
fails 10 avail of these rights under the con-
ditions, he simply valves them, and GER
tainiy has no claim upon the carrier to
make good either his laches or his misfor-
tune. To hold otherwise is as absurd as
would be the claim of the carrier that the
commuter must ride daily, whether or no.
10 require the carrier to make good the
unused trip privileges would amount to
nothing less than another form of substi-
tuting the special for the regular rate, to
the total abolition of the latter which
must be the basis for all special or COM
muted rates, and without which the
former cannot exist For if one chooses
not to use up his trip rights between the
dates of limitation, and still requires the
carrier TO make them good on other dates.
then new and unexpressed condition is
injected into the contract. twould event
uate in every one buying the Communication
ticket and using it at option, thus displac-
ing single fares utterly.
If the logic is good that the dates NAV
he varied, it would be as logical to hold
that the personality has nothing to do with
the contract, and thus one may buy a
ticket AT special rates and transfer it at
will to others, as it cannot, according to
such reasoning, make any difference to the
carrier what human body is carried, so
long as hut one person goes upon a one
trip ticket.
\ good deal of local agitation over this
subject is being worked up at San Fran
cisco, but we venture the prediction that
the absurd and unreasoning claims of
right to use Communication tickets at option
viii not gain footing.